159. Notes - equally sacred / enjoying this

159. 6 July 2019

       Saturday, mid-morning. You are facing the eastern trees in Heritage Park near the north picnic area. Carol is on her walk. You spent most of your focus yesterday on buying a new sound bar to better go with your 'renewed' 2016 fifty-five-inch LED Sony TV given to you and Carol by Kim and Paul who recently purchased fancy fifty-five-inch non-LED TV. Paul is installing their 'refurbished' set today. Two weeks ago, your old sound bar stopped working. Your 2012 fifty-inch TV still works but does not have the bells and whistles the 2016 TV has. - Amorella

       1004 hours. This electronics business is all rather cut and dry, but the research had to be done. Research into any subject is fun at the time because I almost always learn something I did not know about a subject. 

       And why orndorff, is it you do not wish to do more research on me, the Amorella?

       1009 hours. Why, because I am respectful of your position as a Spirit. It is my right to be respectful. I am not doubtful as to what you are, not really, anymore. You have stood the test of my time and human experience. Even if you are completely imaginary, you come from a sacred area within the human experience, a sacred place within where sacredness originates. I am respectful of that place because it is a condition that allows us to grow as individuals and community. And, this goes backs to a variety of books I have read including The Sacred and Profane: The Nature of Religionby Mircea Eliade which I used notes from and eluded to in lectures for my World Mythology junior/senior quarter classes at Indian Hill High School in Cincinnati in the 1970's. I have done research on 'your' setting within me and our species, Amorella. 

** **

A quick review from Amazon books:

The Sacred and The Profane: The Nature of Religion 

by Mircea Eliade  (Author), Willard R. Trask (Translator)

A highly original and scholarly work on spirituality by noted historian Mircea Eliade

In The Sacred and the Profane, Mircea Eliade observes that while contemporary people believe their world is entirely profane, or secular, they still at times find themselves connected unconsciously to the memory of something sacred. It's this premise that both drives Eliade's exhaustive exploration of the sacred; as it has manifested in space, time, nature and the cosmos, and life itself; and buttresses his expansive view of the human experience.

Selected and edited from - https://www.amazon.com/Sacred-Profane-Nature-Religion/dp/015679201X

** **

       You are home. Carol is mowing the grass; you will be trimming the lawn this evening. Ah, Carol comes in to rest from the midday heat. - Amorella

       1132 hours. I am appreciative of your providing a door to the spiritual world through my soul, Miss Havisham. I would not have thought of a soul as a doorway to a greater spiritual world but it appears quite reasonable as any. I wonder, does the spiritual world have an equivalent of the Sacred and the Profane? 

       Good question, orndorff. It does have an equivalent in context. The soul does not 'hover' about the affairs of heartanmind nor do the heart and mind have like interest or needs, as it were. The Living can observe this for themselves. Where does the mind go when you are not consciously using it? Where does the heart go when you are not consciously using it? The soul? Most people don't pay any attention to it unless there is or appears to be a terrible moral conflict that must be addressed. Where I am, what am I doing when Amorella is not in your conscious life? What is the striking difference between using Amorella or the Amorella from my perspective? People have the odd capacity to wonder where G-D is when they don't even consider where their own souls are. - Amorella

       1147 hours. That's funny, Amorella. You are right. People wonder on G-D without really considering their own souls first. That is, aside from the soul being saved or damned; or that is, the heartanmind are to be damned or saved; the soul appears indifferent, a carriage, and neither savable or damnable. At least in context, in here, in this blog. Why don't people consider these things, especially in a down to earth way -- without the heavy philosophy and theology? . . . Is the soul sacred within itself, without a heartansoul? Is it more sacred carrying a heartansoul?

       The soul alone and the soul containing a human-like heartanmind are equally sacred in context with today's blog. Post. - Amorella

       Afternoon. You had lunch at the new Scramblers on US23 across from Kroger's Marketplace and are now in the valley of Slate Park. Carol is on page 320 of Cowen's Darkest Fear. You are wondering about the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy material from a few days ago. Let's open it up and see what we have on "Ancient Theories of Soul" in a semi-outline form. - Amorella

** **

1. The Greek Notion of Soul

". . . while Homer spoke of soul only in the case of human beings, in sixth and fifth century usage, soul is attributed to every kind of living thing. What is in place, then, at this time is the notion that soul is what distinguishes that which is alive from that which is not. 

However, it is not just that soul is said to be present in every living thing. It is also the case that an increasingly broad range of ways of acting and being acted on is attributed to the soul. Thus, it has come to be natural, by the end of the fifth century, to refer pleasure taken in food and drink, as well as sexual desire, to the soul."

         Your response, Miss Havisham. - Amorella

         The soul containing human heartanmind is not spiritual energy. Spiritual energy exists in all living things and is exponentlyexpelled and receivable by humanity through empathetical aspects of the brain. The soul has no human related determination other than protecting and comforting the human heartanmind. mh

2. Pre-Socratic Thinking about the Soul

". . . Like many (or indeed all) sixth and fifth century thinkers who expressed views on the nature or constitution of the soul, Heraclitus thought that the soul was bodily, but composed of an unusually fine or rare kind of matter, e.g. air or fire. (A possible exception is the Pythagorean Philolaus, who may have held that the soul is an ‘attunement’ of the body; cf. Barnes 1982, 488-95, and Huffman.) The prevalence of the idea that the soul is bodily explains the absence of problems about the relation between soul and body. Soul and body were not thought to be radically different in kind; their difference seemed just to consist in a difference in degree of properties such as fineness and mobility."

         The soul is wholly spiritual and not matter. The soul is spiritual the body is material. Within/beside the body exists the spiritual heartanmind which 'absorbs' aspects of the mix of emotional and intellectual solitary estrangement in the brain. - mh

         Later evening. You have been busy since afternoon. Kim, Paul and the boys were over. Paul brought over his 2016 Sony TV and hook it and your new soundbar up and you gave him your old soundbar to use with one of his TVs. You broke it in tonight by watching a new episode of "Bosch" and 'Midsomer Murders". Post what you have. - Amorella

        2254 hours. I am really enjoying this. Interesting to think on even if conjecture.